Landings (was Temple)

[Keith Black]

No kidding, that "no-aileron" landing by Richard Lewis was AWESOME and would
have scored better than many of the landings during the weekend.

Last Saturday in Waco the wind was vicious. Sustained speeds were from 20 to
25 mph with frequent gusts going even higher. Landings were anything but
routine and quite frankly down right scary. Planes would hit air pockets and
drop or rise five or more feet on final which made the reward of a safe
landing more about survival than points derived from the landing.

Due to the windy conditions the CD took a vote to see if we should only give
0 and 10 scores on landings and take-offs, especially since that's how it
will be done next year. The vote passed and we proceeded to fly. The Temple
runway isn't very long so it was decided that the entire runway would be the
landing zone, I'm guessing it's probably even shorter than the 100 meter
landing zone as is described in next year's rules.

What followed was a comical series of landings ranging from top fliers to
the sportsman pilots. Planes were landing everywhere from one end of the
runway to the other, bouncing all over the place, landing then re-launching
themselves due to the strong wind, landing on the runway then rolling out of
control off the side, slamming into the runway with broken props and parts
flying here and there, and after each of these out of control landings the
peanut gallery could be heard hollering "TEN". In fact when air pockets
would abruptly lift an almost settled plane eight or ten feet into the air
pilots would force the planes down in "glider-like" spot landings just
before the end of the runway, WHACK.... "TEN".  I was even guilty of this
once when my engine wouldn't die and a gust of wind lifted me just before
touch down. I knew I had to get it down before the end of the runway and
technique was not a factor... WHACK ... WHO HOO, TEN!! It wasn't pretty but
if I hadn't gotten that ten I wouldn't have taken first place in
intermediate.

Sunday dawns and the winds are much more intermittent and not nearly as
strong. Sometimes they where still a factor, but not most of the time. Guess
what, the landing shenanigans didn't disappear! And those beautiful
take-offs that I've always admired were frequently replaced by the typical
sport flier take-offs, slam full throttle and yank it up. I personally still
shot for wheels up dead center, but people that enter the sport from next
year on won't even know about this obsolete and beautiful aspect of the
sport (very sad).

So this got me thinking, what ARE the details of the new rules for take-offs
and landings?  Surely they weren't being applied correctly last weekend, it
was quite silly, frequently sending people into fits of laughter. So I
looked at the new rule verbiage and found that we were pretty much applying
the rule correctly except for one item, the plane must roll 10 meters before
careening off the runway. The rules also say that landing gear cannot
retract or collapse and the plane can't end up on its back, but I never saw
that occur. It doesn't state, however, that a plane can't violently hit the
landing area sending pieces flying off. It's possible that meeting terra
firma in an unhealthy manner is covered elsewhere in the rule book, but it's
not specified in the new landing rule.

The rule proposal mentioned that part of the logic in changing this rule was
to reduce time spent discussing landings and take-offs prior to each
contest. No doubt this does always have to be discussed and frequently
causes many disputes. Yet after this weekend I'm not sure there won't still
need to be discussion at each contest. This is the reason I'm writing this
message, to discuss how this new rule will actually be implemented. Clearly
at each contest the CD will have to discuss at the pilots meeting where the
markings are for the 100 meter landing area, but in addition to that I have
the following questions:

1. Is it OK to smash your aircraft into the "landing area"?

2. If yes to #1, is it OK to send parts flying off of the plane? The new
landing rules does not discuss this and the "Pattern Judges' Guide" under
D.8 that covers items falling off the aircraft applies to airborne aircraft.

3. Is it OK to land, roll ten meters "completing landing", then lift off of
the ground again and glide to a second landing outside the landing area? The
new rule says nothing about flying speed.

4. Is it OK to land, roll ten meters then roll off the runway in an erratic
manner at a very high speed?

5. Is it OK to land, roll ten meters "completing landing" roll off the
runway *then* flip over on your back? If landing is "complete" how can one
be penalized for what follows?

6. Is it necessary for the plane to stop bouncing before the ten meter
roll-out begins (in other words is the ten meter rollout started at first
touch down or after the bouncing stops). This isn't specified in the new
rule.

7. If you touch down gracefully nine meters before the end of the "landing
area" and roll off the end are you given a zero because you left the landing
area before rolling ten meters (sort of like rolling off the side of the
runway before a 10 meter roll-out)? If so should we mark 10 meter marks
before the end of the landing areas?

I'm sure there are many other questions, but these are a few that came to
mind after the events this weekend.

BTW, I don't want to leave the impression that the Temple contest was run in
anything less than a top notch manner. As CD BW did an excellent job, kept
on top of things at all times and made sure everything took place in an
organized and safe manner. The decision to judge 0 or 10 was to increase
safety by allowing contestants more flexibility in getting their planes to
the ground with the high winds. I appreciate him doing this and his concern
for the pilots.

Keith Black


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "flyintexan" <flyintexan at houston.rr.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Temple


> Just gotta talk about that save by Richard Lewis at Temple....
>
> NO ailerons (one trailing), 25+ mph wind, and he put that G-trick on the
> centerline of the runway.  Nice job Richard.
>
>
> -mark
>
>
> >On Mon, 24 May 2004 12:54:05 -0500 Keith Black <tkeithb at comcast.net>
wrote.
> >Ditto! 36 pilots, 6 rounds, over 210 flights. It's so nice to get in six
>
> >rounds. Great job of keeping things moving!
>
> >
>
> >The Temple club, and BW's family, were out in force to pull this off. I
was
>
> >surprised to hear how many club members have assisted in every Temple
>
> >pattern contest over the last 15 or 16 years since the contest was
>
> >initiated. Thanks to everyone who made this possible.
>
> >
>
> >Keith Black
>
> >
>
> >----- Original Message ----- 
>
> >  From: Mark Hunt
>
> >  To: discussion at nsrca.org
>
> >  Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 6:48 AM
>
> >  Subject: Temple
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >  I wanted to say thanks to the guys (and Ladies) at Temple who did an
>
> >outstanding job running a great pattern contest.  More than 30 pilots and
6
>
> >rounds of flying.  Well done.
>
> >
>
> >  Thanks again.
>
> >
>
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.